Legal Opinion

Thompson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 30, 1998PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FLAHERTY, Judge.

The critical issue that this court must determine is, in a termination proceeding where the Employer’s medical witness does not clearly state that the claimant is “fully recovered,” whether or not the medical evidence is equivocal where the Employer’s medical witness, in a medical report, released Claimant to only light duty with significant restrictions and later testified that the restrictions were for an accommodation to the Claimant’s subjective complaints, and that the restrictions were not work-related.

Ella Thompson (Claimant) petitions this court to review two orders of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Udvari v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Greenwich Collieries v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Callahan v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Laird v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. B & T Trucking v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Saville v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Quaglia v. State Ethics CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  4. Thompson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  5. D. St. Fleur v. WCAB (Anvil Int'l, Inc.)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API